As Conservatives Search In Vain For A Bush Agenda, The Post Editors Turn On Him
The Washington Post editorial board has been one of the biggest apologists for W since he came into power. Whether it be the war on terror, the Iraq war, or even his first tax cut, Bob Woodward, Len Downie, and Bob Kaiser have kissed Bush's fanny time after time. Until recently.
With the Post running a Page One on Monday summarizing the concerns of conservatives that this administration is already out of gas from a policy perspective, the lead editorial on Monday mirrors this concern by pointing out that Bush has accomplished relatively little. Furthermore, the Post editors point out that Bush has offered relatively little in terms of a second-term agenda, and that his economic claims of success are both self-serving and have either been oversold or have come at an extremely high cost.
Sure, as the editors note, we can expect the usual blather about privatizing Social Security, eliminating regulations, more tax cuts, tort reform, yada yada yada, from Bush and his team. But given this Administration's poor record of introducing ideas and then abandoning them when no one is looking, coupled with the politics is policy approach first revealed by Paul O'Neill, means that another four years of Bush would be similarly bankrupt of intellectual merit but surely smacking of political craveness and damage to our nation's social fabric.